Saturday, February 25, 2012

A man prays at the Islamic Cultural Center in Newark, which was included on a surveillance list by the New York Police Department to monitor Muslims' businesses, mosques and community centers. RNS photo by Aristide Economopoulos/The Star-Ledger.

NEWARK, N.J. (RNS) The report was stamped top secret.

Inside was a confidential dossier compiled by the New York Police Department documenting "locations of concern" in Newark -- the city's 44 mosques, Muslim-owned restaurants and businesses and Islamic schools.

In 2007, the NYPD began an undercover spy operation within New Jersey's largest city to find and document where Muslims lived, worked and prayed.

Now, city officials and many of those targeted are voicing anger at the disclosures, which came in the wake of an Associated Press report showing that a secret NYPD surveillance program aimed at Muslims had extended well beyond New York City.

"I have deep concerns and I am very disturbed that this might have been surveillance that was based on no more than religious affiliation," Newark Mayor Cory Booker said.

Booker said he had been unaware of the undercover work and the Newark Police Department -- which had been contacted by the NYPD early on -- had not been involved in any joint operations.

"What we are discovering appears to be an NYPD operation in our city that involved the blanket surveillance of Newark residents and workers based solely on the religion of those individuals," he said. "If this is indeed what transpired, it is, I believe, a clear infringement on the core liberties of our citizenry."

Separately, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey immediately demanded a further investigation by the state attorney general, calling it a "violation of the public trust."

Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the NYPD has been methodically compiling data on the region's Muslim populations, infiltrating mosques and student groups, and building profiles of local ethnic groups.

But new reports on the extent of that surveillance operation revealed the NYPD had been operating well outside its jurisdiction, cataloging Muslim communities on Long Island and New Jersey, and monitoring Muslim college students across the region.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has strongly defended his department.

"The police department goes where there are allegations. And they look to see whether those allegations are true," he told reporters on Tuesday (Feb. 21). "That's what you'd expect them to do. That's what you'd want them to do. Remind yourself when you turn out the light tonight."

In Newark, the NYPD apparently cataloged every mosque and Muslim-owned business in the city -- from fried-chicken joints to houses of worship located in private homes.

There was no mention of terrorism or any criminal wrongdoing in the 60-page report, obtained by The Associated Press, which described the aim of the surveillance as compiling "the existence of population centers and business districts of communities of interest."

Most of the properties listed in the NYPD report were Islamic cultural centers, restaurants and stores where members of Newark's Muslim community went to pray, eat or shop.

The report carries the tone of a dispassionate tour guide. A page on Newark Fried Chicken said the restaurant was owned and operated by Afghans. "Location is in good location and has seating capacity for 10 to 15 customers," the report said.

An entry for Masjid Fallahee labeled it a private house where 25 to 30 worshippers of Nigerian and West African ethnicities had been seen in prayer.

Inside the Islamic Cultural Center, Abdul Khabir called the NYPD investigation "unfortunate" but said it did not bother him because he had nothing to hide. "We just want to serve Allah," Khabir said.

At the Dollar Deal store on Broad Street, 25-year-old Watas Ali struggled to understand why his business was involved in a police probe.

"They separate us from other businesses just because we're Muslim?" he asked. "It's unfair."

Abu Muhmad, a senior administrator at the Masjid Rahmah, a mosque on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, said reports of surveillance are not a revelation to him. He said FBI agents had been coming to the mosque for years.

"We know for a fact agents are out there listening to what is being said at prayers," particularly on Fridays, when hundreds come to pray at the mosque, he said.

But, like several who came for prayers yesterday, Muhmad said mosque leaders accepted the scrutiny as a sign of the times, however unfortunate.

"We understand the situation," he said.

One member of the mosque, however, Abdur Rahman, called the surveillance effort offensive. "It's crazy," Rahman said as the mosque's amplified call to prayer sounded outside. "It's a form of stereotyping. It's stupid."

City Councilman Anibal Ramos Jr. labeled the disclosures shocking.

"Newark is a town that's made up of folks from all over the world," he said. "Every resident has a right to have their privacy protected," he said. "Unless they're targeted for a specific investigation, then I don't understand."

(David Giambusso and James Queally write for The Star-Ledger in Newark, N.J. Staff writers Richard Khavkine and Ted Sherman contributed to this report.)

The Pilgrim Chapel at Dallas Baptist University. The Southern Baptist Convention decided against a name change, and marketing experts agree changing a brand identity is often easier said than done. RNS photo courtesy Reagan Rothenberger/Wikimedia Commons.

Maybe, but as the advertising executives of Madison Avenue here could attest, as tempting as it is to try to solve a missionary slump with a marketing campaign, religious groups -- like commercial businesses -- should think twice before undergoing a brand overhaul.

After months of deliberations, an SBC task force on Feb. 20 recommended against trying to re-brand the denomination, an idea that has been bandied about for more than a century.

Proponents of a change made a good case: for a denomination that was born in 1845 out of a defense of slavery, the name has since saddled Southern Baptists with a problematic name and historical baggage.

Advocates -- including top SBC leaders -- argued that the name of the nation's largest Protestant body wasn't helping reverse a decline in baptisms and church plantings. One reason, they said, was the "Southern" part of their name made it hard to expand beyond its largely white base in the Bible Belt, and racial and ethnic minorities often balk when they see the Southern Baptist name.

"There is so much to celebrate in the heritage of our beloved denomination, but there is also a deep stain that is associated with slavery," R. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote as the debate heated up.

"If these issues can be resolved, even to any significant degree, by a name change, a Gospel-minded people would never hesitate to consider such a proposal."

There were also strong currents running against a change, however. Some objections were rooted in an emotional loyalty to tradition and culture that can make a debate over repainting the church walls into an occasion for schism.

"We believe that the equity that we have in the name Southern Baptist Convention is valuable," said Jimmy Draper, head of the SBC task force. "It is a strong name that identifies who we are in theology, morality and ethics, compassion, ministry and mission in the world. It is a name that is recognized globally in these areas."

Makeovers are not only expensive and fraught with potential legal problems -- factors that were raised by the SBC task force -- but they may not work. Exhibit A: Coca-Cola's failed 1985 effort to introduce "New Coke," or Tropicana's updated but deeply unpopular package design for its orange juice, or Gap's swift rejection of a poorly received new logo.

"Brands that play against consumer behavior always lose," said Josh Feldmeth, head of the New York office of Interbrand, an international brand consultancy business.

Campus Crusade for Christ, the worldwide ministry started in 1951 by the late Bill Bright and his wife, is this year introducing a new moniker, "Cru," that some worry could become the "New Coke" of evangelical Christianity.

Elsewhere, evangelical leader Tony Campolo has taken to calling himself a "Red Letter Christian" because he worries that the evangelical brand has become too politicized. The rock-ribbed Christians at Bob Jones University in South Carolina have been looking -- so far in vain -- for an alternative to the "fundamentalist" label that they once wore so proudly.

Mormon leaders are also making a push to have the church called only by its formal name, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, because they feel the "Mormon" label can be derogatory or raise undesirable associations with polygamist splinter groups.

But Feldmeth, who was raised an evangelical and graduated from Wheaton College, said LDS leaders might want to think twice.

The word "Mormon," like "Southern Baptist," has strong name recognition and immediately conveys a clear image -- both valuable assets. If that image is not the one you want to project -- for example, a LifeWay Research survey showed that 40 percent of Americans have a negative impression of Southern Baptists -- then you have to figure out why rather than just slapping a new label on the same old product.

"I think you should stick to your mission and just work harder to explain why your mission matters," said Feldmeth, who is now a practicing member of the Episcopal Church, which was forced to re-brand after the Revolutionary War made associations with Anglicanism dicey.

"Brands exist to change behavior. That applies to the religious world as much as it does to the business world," he said. "You create a McDonald's to change the way people eat."

It's also not easy to find a good alternative. "Mormon" is memorable and short, while the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a mouthful. The "American Baptist" name was taken in 1950 by the Baptists' northern branch, and black Baptists snagged the "National Baptist" brand way back in 1895. For what it's worth, "Primitive Baptist" and "Hard Shell Baptist" are taken, too.

Clint Henry, pastor of Central Valley Baptist Church in Meridian, Idaho, baptizes a new member at Eagle Island State Park. The Southern Baptist Convention decided against an official name change. RNS photo courtesy Baptist Press.

In the end, all the Southern Baptist task force could do was offer an unofficial alternative, "Great Commission Baptists," for congregations that want at least something a little different.

It seems unlikely the "GCB" moniker will win out, but an evolutionary approach to re-branding can work; International Business Machines effectively reinvented itself as IBM, and General Electric did the same by switching to GE.

If all else fails, Southern Baptists and Mormons can take heart from historical precedent. The early followers of Jesus were disparagingly referred to as "little Christs" -- hence the term Christians, a brand few churches are eager to give up.

Likewise, the name "Lutheran" was first used to mock the Protestant reformer Martin Luther, who didn't much like the term either. But it stuck, and worked. In that same period, members of the new Catholic Counter-Reformation order, the Society of Jesus, were dismissively referred to as "Jesuits," yet that brand has had some staying power.

And in the 18th century, followers of John and Charles Wesley were derided for their "methodical" approach to spiritual growth -- but thanks to those cultured despisers, we now have Methodists.

"In the end," said Feldmeth, "they made the brand what they wanted it to be."

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Yesterday, the Salt Lake Tribune reported that despite the LDS Church's repeated assurances that it would no longer baptize Holocaust victims, someone in the Dominican Republic has recently done precisely that. For Anne Frank, no less.

Moreover, she has been baptized in this way before, only to have the ordinance invalidated because of public complaints about Mormon insensitivity.

The last two weeks have seen an unprecedented display of media attention to the LDS ritual of baptism for the dead, or "proxy baptism." As for the semantics, both terms are correct, but you can certainly see why in recent years the LDS Church has sought to use the "proxy baptism" label to avoid misunderstandings. (A member of my own extended family, for example, was once convinced that Mormons exhumed the bones of dead people and dragged them forcibly to LDS temples. Aside from the obvious ick factor (as Buffy would say, "raise your hand if eeeewwww"), the logistics of such an undertaking would be seriously daunting.)

I've been following much of the recent media coverage and the popular response. I've already issued a public plea for Mormons to exercise better judgment when thinking about baptizing any deceased Jews, not just Holocaust victims, and explained some theological points of contention. Here I want to focus instead on the actual practice of proxy baptism, and clear up several misconceptions about how and why it takes place.

1) Proxy baptism is a surprisingly decentralized process.

In a podcast interview on Mormon Matters this week, I made the argument that the public perception of the LDS Church as somehow authorizing Holocaust baptisms is the Church's own fault. That's not because the Church has equivocated in any way about Holocaust baptisms; it has repeatedly insisted that they are simply not acceptable. It's because the Church has a well-deserved reputation -- one that it constantly encourages -- as being a top-down centralized organization that runs a very tight ship.

The problem is that temple work, which includes baptism for the dead, isn't remotely a tight ship.

Temple rituals happen when individual Mormons around the world -- not the official organization in Salt Lake City -- submit the names and dates of deceased ancestors through software called TempleReady. The first time I ever did this back in 1994, I was surprised by the lack of bureaucratic oversight in the process. I had been doing genealogical research on my ancestors. I submitted those names to the Washington, D.C. temple for approval, then set a date when a group of people from my ward in New Jersey could come with me to perform the baptisms. No one at the temple checked to make sure those names were those of my actual ancestors (though they were). For such a hierarchical organization, the Church's approach to temple work was highly individualistic, even laissez faire. Some oversight has been instituted since 1995 to prevent baptisms of Holocaust victims, or of celebrities unrelated to the church member who submits the names, but it's still all too possible for an individual Mormon to "go rogue" in this matter. I'm almost never one for stricter controls on the part of the LDS hierarchy, which already wants to dictate too much of Mormon life, but in this case greater supervision is essential.

2) Proxy baptism does not equal posthumous conversion.

This week I stumbled upon the hilarious website alldeadmormonsaregay.com, a satirical approach that lampoons Mormons' heavy-handedness with the dead and the living.

Sadly, many Mormons throughout history have died without having known the joys of homosexuality. With your help, these poor souls can be saved.

Simply enter the name of your favorite dead Mormon in the form below and click Convert! Presto, they're gay for eternity. There is no undo.

I got a great laugh out of this -- and I "converted" an alleged Mormon named Janet Lee into being gay. But despite the welcome humor, the site is predicated on two errors: a) that any name listed in the International Genealogical Index is of a Mormon (the vast majority are not Mormon, just like the vast majority of the human population is not Mormon); and b) that a proxy ordinance "converts" any individual in the hereafter. As I said in my post last week, it may not matter to outsiders that this is not a ritual of conversion but one of opportunity -- individuals on the other side of the veil are absolutely entitled to refuse the ordinance if they choose -- but it would be nice if outsiders at least knew the facts about what Mormons actually think they are doing. (As a Jewish friend of mine put it last week in an email conversation, he understands that Mormon proxy baptism is like getting a credit card offer in the mail: it's up to him to activate it. He's still not interested, thanks.)

The IGI question is interesting. Last week Elie Wiesel called upon Mitt Romney for moral reform when Wiesel learned that his own Jewish parents were listed in the IGI. But as I said above, the IGI is not an index of non-Mormons who have had temple rituals performed for them; there is a much smaller database of those names. The LDS Church through its genealogical program scans parish registers, census data, military records, obituaries, marriage licenses and the like for many nations and many centuries and consolidates them into a huge public record that is available to all. Some fraction of the people listed in the IGI have had ordinances done, but most have not. So when I "converted" a Janet Lee from being "Mormon" to being gay, chances are actually better that Janet was Anglican, Catholic, or agnostic than Mormon.

3) Mitt Romney is probably not dissembling when he says he hasn't participated in proxy baptisms for a long time.

This is a minor point, but I have gotten the feeling that some members of the media doubt Mitt Romney's veracity when he claims to have participated in proxy baptism in the past, but not in a long time. This isn't flip-flopping. In Mormon tradition, proxy baptism is a ritual usually performed by teenagers and young adults, not middle-aged or older folks like Romney. For many Mormon youth, proxy baptism is their first introduction to a Mormon temple. Although the ritual itself is basically the same as any live baptism performed in an ordinary meetinghouse and open to the public, it takes on a new significance within the "sacred space" of the temple.

Mitt Romney's older grandkids are probably doing proxy baptisms for the dead nowadays, but Mitt and Ann wouldn't be unusual if they hadn't done so in some time, except perhaps as chaperones on a youth temple trip.

The last point is a very basic one. Mormons generally have the best of intentions when they perform proxy baptism, and their belief actually benefits the world in a specific and tangible way; because they pour so much energy into collecting geneaological information and making it publicly available, they provide a gift of recordkeeping to the world.

(RNS) Many African-American atheists say that the act of "coming out" as nonbelievers in their community is to risk everything -- friends, family, business ties -- even their racial and cultural identity. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (0)

Why is Martin Luther King, a Christian, remembered by so many for his contributions to the civil rights movement while A. Philip Randolph, an atheist, is honored by so few? That is a question many black nonbelievers are asking this Black History Month. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (5)

NEW ORLEANS (RNS) After months of urging from other Baptists around the country, the Rev. Fred Luter confirmed he is running to be the first African-American president of the predominantly white Southern Baptist Convention. Several Baptist leaders said Luter becomes the prohibitive favorite for the post. By Bruce Nolan.More | Comments (1)

(RNS) If you're an atheist who loses a child or loved one, there's no hope of a reunion in the afterlife. The absence of the comfort of religious ritual is one of the hardest adjustments for unbelievers, leading some nonbelievers to craft support groups and resources for grief without God. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (2)

(RNS) Sunday's (Feb. 26) ``Day of Solidarity for Black Non-Believers, will include a remembrance of African-American atheists of the past. Here's a list of some famous (and not-so-famous) black nonbelievers. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

“If there are threats or leads to follow, then the NYPD’s job is to do it. The law is pretty clear about what’s the requirement, and I think they follow the law….We don’t stop to think about the religion. We stop to think about the threats and focus our efforts there.” [emphasis added]

“We have to keep this country safe. This is a dangerous place. Make no mistake about it. It’s very cute to go and to blame everybody and say we should stay away from anything that smacks of intelligence gathering. The job of our law enforcement is to make sure that they prevent things. And you only do that by being proactive.”

Bloomberg then went on an odd rant, connecting the NYPD’s racial and religious profiling of Muslims to our cherished freedom of speech:

You have to respect people’s right to privacy. You have to obey the law. And I think the police officers across this country, at the federal level, state level, the city level, do that. But having said all of that, you are not going to survive, you will not be able to be a journalist and write what you want to say if the people who want to take away your freedoms are allowed to succeed.

Great… We don’t want the “people who want to take away your freedoms” [terrorists] to succeed. So to make sure that they don’t succeed, we will take away our own freedoms.

To make sure others don’t destroy what’s so great about America, we’ll destroy ourselves.

Take that, terrorists! You didn’t get to destroy us after all. We did it to ourselves.

Mr. Bloomberg, where you are choosing to stand in this time of crisis is unbecoming of the leader of one of the most cosmopolitan cities of the world.

Mr. Bloomberg: Allow me to introduce you to a person you seem to have forgotten about. A fairly important person, named Benjamin Franklin: “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Mr. Bloomberg: This choice between “essential liberty” and “a little temporary safety” is a false one, and unworthy of our American Dream.

Mr. Bloomberg: By profiling, spying on, and marginalizing the weakest and most vilified citizens of our country, you trample on the liberties of all of us, and fail to deliver us safety. Two losses, with no gain.

(RNS) A federal court on Wednesday (Feb. 22) struck down a Washington state rule that requires pharmacists to dispense the morning-after pill even if it violates their religious beliefs.

Religious liberty advocates cheered the decision. They have decried the 2007 state regulation as a violation of pharmacists' First Amendment rights, which guarantee freedom of religion.

"Today's decision sends a very clear message: No individual can be forced out of her profession solely because of her religious beliefs," said Luke Goodrich, deputy national litigation director at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

The Becket Fund was co-counsel for two pharmacists who believe that life begins at the fertilization of a human egg, and can be destroyed by the pills.

Many advocates for women's health had applauded the state's Board of Pharmacy rule of as a way to guarantee greater access to the drugs within the short time frame -- between three and five days after intercourse -- when they are effective. When taken soon after unprotected sexual intercourse, the drugs (known as Plan B and ella) are between 75 to 90 percent effective at preventing pregnancy.

The decision comes in the midst of a firestorm over the Obama administration's Jan. 20 decision to require nearly all employers to cover free birth control through their insurance plans. That decision has outraged religious conservatives who consider it a directive to ignore their religious convictions.

(RNS) Sunday's (Feb. 26) ``Day of Solidarity for Black Non-Believers, will include a remembrance of African-American atheists of the past. Here's a list of some famous (and not-so-famous) black nonbelievers. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

Why is Martin Luther King, a Christian, remembered by so many for his contributions to the civil rights movement while A. Philip Randolph, an atheist, is honored by so few? That is a question many black nonbelievers are asking this Black History Month. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

Why is Martin Luther King, a Christian, remembered by so many for his contributions to the civil rights movement while A. Philip Randolph, an atheist, is honored by so few? That is a question many black nonbelievers are asking this Black History Month. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

(RNS) Sunday's (Feb. 26) ``Day of Solidarity for Black Non-Believers, will include a remembrance of African-American atheists of the past. Here's a list of some famous (and not-so-famous) black nonbelievers. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

Mandisa Thomas of Atlanta is featured alongside Langston Hughes on a billboard in Atlanta that's part of a campaign featuring icons of the civil rights movement who were not religious, sponsored by the group African Americans for Humanism. RNS photo by Bob Mahoney.

Why is Martin Luther King, a Christian, remembered by so many for his contributions to the civil rights movement while A. Philip Randolph, an atheist, is honored by so few? That is a question many black nonbelievers are asking this Black History Month. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

(RNS) Sunday's (Feb. 26) ``Day of Solidarity for Black Non-Believers, will include a remembrance of African-American atheists of the past. Here's a list of some famous (and not-so-famous) black nonbelievers. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

A. Philip Randolph was the co-leader with Martin Luther King of the 1963 March on Washington and was the founder of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, the first predominantly black union. RNS photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

Why is Martin Luther King, a Christian, remembered by so many for his contributions to the civil rights movement while A. Philip Randolph, an atheist, is honored by so few? That is a question many black nonbelievers are asking this Black History Month. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

(RNS) Sunday's (Feb. 26) ``Day of Solidarity for Black Non-Believers, will include a remembrance of African-American atheists of the past. Here's a list of some famous (and not-so-famous) black nonbelievers. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (1)

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

DURHAM, N.C. (RNS) There is something decidedly public about Ash Wednesday. Walking around all day with a gash of grey ash across one’s forehead -- this is among the most visible Christian things I do each year. This is a rare day when I cannot and could not hide my Christian commitments and my Christian aspirations, even if I wanted to.

This year, I will be joining many Episcopal priests in taking the public witness of Ash Wednesday one step further. On Wednesday, my colleague Catherine Caimano and I will put on cassocks and surplices, and go to a corner near Duke University Hospital with small containers of ashes and copies of a litany of repentance from the Book of Common Prayer. We will offer “the imposition of ashes” to people in the street.

We will offer to pray with people -- prayers that name our failings and our striving to change: “We confess to you and to one another, and to the whole communion of saints in heaven and on earth, that we have sinned by our own fault in thought, word, and deed,” our Ash Wednesday litany bids us to say. “We confess our self-indulgent appetites and ways, and our exploitation of other people…our intemperate love of worldly goods and comforts, and our dishonesty in daily life and work…our waste and pollution of your creation, and our lack of concern for those who come after us.”

And Cathie and I will offer to mark people’s forehead with a cross of ashes. As we make the sign of the cross, we will say “Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

Because we suspect that penance is usually done best when one joins in a community of people who are pursuing penance together, Cathie and I will also have on hand small cards listing the whereabouts and webpages of nearby Episcopal churches. And we will offer people a copy of a devotional book called "Bread And Wine: Readings For Lent And Easter," which might prompt the people we meet to continue to reflect on and pray about the things our streetside liturgy names: sin; repentance; forgiveness.

Repentance has a public aspect and a private aspect. Jesus speaks very clearly about doing one’s repentance in secret -- not chattering on in public about how hungry your pious fasting has left you. At the same time, the church also has a ministry to call -- publicly -- for repentance, to sometimes play the role of John the Baptist. Calls for repentance happen every week, every day, inside religious buildings, inside religious communities. Sometimes calls for repentance need to happen out on the street corners, too.

Still, this is a strange thing to do, this liturgy outside a hospital. It does not feel entirely comfortable to me -- but I am not sure anything about Ash Wednesday ever feels entirely comfortable.

I would add that there is something about Ash Wednesday -- the day the church sets aside for people to acknowledge, before God and one another, our mortality, our finitude and our moral failings -- that suggests taking this particular liturgical action into the streets (besides following, as it does, the public revelry of Mardi Gras, Fat Tuesday). We are going into public with our ashes because Jesus died in public. He didn’t die in the Upper Room surrounded only by his disciples.

What ministers with their ashes are offering is a bodily marker of God’s entry into our death. The ashes Cathie will inscribe on my forehead, and I on hers, let me name truths that most days I cannot or will not name -- that I have sinned; also, that I have a body, and I am going to die. To walk around all day with a cross on your head is to walk around in a body inscribed with death. It is also, oddly, to walk around inscribed with hope -- the hope that comes through Jesus’ having joined us in our mortality.

To my mind, the priests who offer ashes in public on Wednesday are not doing something for the sake of convenience or expediency; this is not liturgical fast-food. Cathie and I will be in front of the hospital offering an invitation to willing passersby to join us in reflecting on our limitations and sins and our need for God’s grace. And we will be in public, with our prayers and our crosses of ash, to meet the Christ who died in a public place.

Lauren Winner teaches at Duke Divinity School in Durham, N.C., and was recently ordained an Episcopal priest. Her new book is Still: Notes on a Mid-Faith Crisis.

"More than 2,000 years ago, a child was born to two faithful travelers who could find rest only in a stable, among the cattle and the sheep. But this was not just any child. Christ’s birth made the angels rejoice and attracted shepherds and kings from afar. He was a manifestation of God’s love for us.

"And He grew up to become a leader with a servant’s heart who taught us a message as simple as it is powerful: that we should love God, and love our neighbor as ourselves. That teaching has come to encircle the globe. No matter who we are, or where we come from, or how we worship, it’s a message that can unite all of us on this holiday season."

"I wanted to host this breakfast for a simple reason -– because as busy as we are, as many tasks as pile up, during this season, we are reminded that there’s something about the resurrection -- something about the resurrection of our savior, Jesus Christ, that puts everything else in perspective.

"We all live in the hustle and bustle of our work. And everybody in this room has weighty responsibilities, from leading churches and denominations, to helping to administer important government programs, to shaping our culture in various ways. And I admit that my plate has been full as well. The inbox keeps on accumulating.

"But then comes Holy Week. The triumph of Palm Sunday. The humility of Jesus washing the disciples’ feet. His slow march up that hill, and the pain and the scorn and the shame of the cross. And we’re reminded that in that moment, he took on the sins of the world -- past, present and future -- and he extended to us that unfathomable gift of grace and salvation through his death and resurrection."

"And like all of us, my faith journey has had its twists and turns. It hasn’t always been a straight line. I have thanked God for the joys of parenthood and Michelle’s willingness to put up with me. In the wake of failures and disappointments I've questioned what God had in store for me and been reminded that God’s plans for us may not always match our own short-sighted desires.

"And let me tell you, these past two years, they have deepened my faith. The presidency has a funny way of making a person feel the need to pray. Abe Lincoln said, as many of you know, 'I have been driven to my knees many times by the overwhelming conviction that I had no place else to go.'"

"For even after the passage of 2,000 years, we can still picture the moment in our mind’s eye. The young man from Nazareth marched through Jerusalem; object of scorn and derision and abuse and torture by an empire. The agony of crucifixion amid the cries of thieves. The discovery, just three days later, that would forever alter our world -- that the Son of Man was not to be found in His tomb and that Jesus Christ had risen.

"We are awed by the grace He showed even to those who would have killed Him. We are thankful for the sacrifice He gave for the sins of humanity. And we glory in the promise of redemption in the resurrection."

"I was not raised in a particularly religious household. I had a father who was born a Muslim but became an atheist, grandparents who were non-practicing Methodists and Baptists, and a mother who was skeptical of organized religion, even as she was the kindest, most spiritual person I’ve ever known. She was the one who taught me as a child to love, and to understand, and to do unto others as I would want done.

"I didn’t become a Christian until many years later, when I moved to the South Side of Chicago after college. It happened not because of indoctrination or a sudden revelation, but because I spent month after month working with church folks who simply wanted to help neighbors who were down on their luck – no matter what they looked like, or where they came from, or who they prayed to. It was on those streets, in those neighborhoods, that I first heard God’s spirit beckon me. It was there that I felt called to a higher purpose – His purpose."

The time has come again to bring out the king cake and the purple beads, the pancakes and the colorful masks. And then to put them all away again, along with our alleluias. Thus we begin the long season of Lent.

I try to do something for Lent every year. I'm aware of the beautiful tradition of not giving up something, but adding something -- a new spiritual practice, a daily devotion -- but to be honest it never had the desired effect in my life of helping me reflect more or grow closer to God. Sacrifices, even small ones, tend to do more good in my spiritual life than the added practices, perhaps because sacrifices are so concrete and specific.

Last year I gave up "being critical" for Lent. Anyone who knows me or reads my blog regularly will probably know that I messed up repeatedly at this. However, I took away a valuable lesson from screwing up so many times -- that I was even more critical than I imagined, and that I needed to guard my words.

This year I have two separate Lenten disciplines:

1. I am going to avoid "author vanity" things like reading reviews, checking sales figures, visiting Goodreads.com, or Googling my book. The wonderful reception Flunking Sainthood has received has been very affirming, but the danger is that such praise is addictive. It's time to step away from that treadmill.

2. I am giving up TV. (As I said in the post header, thank God Downton Abbey had the decency to end before Lent began. That was jolly good scheduling, wasn't it?) I hope and expect that the time this frees up in my life will result in deeper prayer and greater connections with my fellow human beings. I also harbor hopes that I will re-learn Spanish, read a book a day, and usher in a new era of world peace. Hey, a girl can dream.

WASHINGTON (RNS) Republican presidential contender Rick Santorum, leading the GOP field in national polls, is defending his views questioning prenatal testing and President Obama's "theology."

The unapologetic advocacy by Santorum seemed sure to please social conservatives in the Republican Party but also fuel questions about whether he could appeal to independent voters in a general election.

Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday (Feb. 19), Santorum objected to including some prenatal tests in federal insurance mandates, saying the tests lead to more abortions.

"A lot of prenatal tests are done to identify deformities in utero, and the customary procedure is to encourage abortions," he said. "We know that 90 percent of Down syndrome children in America are aborted."

At a campaign event over the weekend in Columbus, Ohio, he said the tests effectively "cull the ranks of the disabled in our society."

He objected to provisions in the health care law that require coverage of prenatal testing for expectant mothers, saying some tests shouldn't be included. He mentioned amniocentesis, a test that can detect chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses such as Down syndrome.

The former Pennsylvania senator said he was not questioning the president's faith when, at another event in Columbus, Ohio, he said Obama's agenda followed "some phony ideal, some phony theology -- oh, not a theology based on the Bible, a different theology."

Santorum said he was referring to "radical environmentalists" who believe "that man is here to serve the Earth as opposed to husband its resources and be good stewards of the Earth."

"I wasn't suggesting the president's not a Christian," he said.

On ABC's "This Week," Obama adviser Robert Gibbs called Santorum's original remarks "over the line" and said, "It's time to have a debate on our political positions, but not question each other's character and faith."

TORONTO (RNS) Canada's highest court has ruled that children in Quebec schools cannot opt out of a course on ethics and world religions.

The Supreme Court on Feb. 17 unanimously rejected an appeal from Catholic parents who sought to keep their children out of the course because they felt that exposing them to a variety of religions would confuse them.

The nine high court judges disagreed, saying that exposing children to beliefs and values that differ from their own is a fact of life in Canada's multicultural society.

"The early exposure of children to realities that differ from those in their immediate family environment is a fact of life in society," the court ruled.

Simply teaching children other religions "does not constitute an indoctrination of students that would infringe on the (parents') freedom of religion," the court found.Two of the nine Supreme Court justices noted that while the teaching methods and content of the course are "sketchy," the parents had not made their case.

The mandatory course on ethics and religious culture is seen as part of Quebec's ongoing march toward secularism. It covers many world religions but from a cultural perspective.

When it was established in 2008, some Catholic parents objected, claiming their children would be confused by contact with beliefs that were mostly incompatible with what they learned at home and at church.

Parents also argued that the classes infringed on their freedom of conscience and religion under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Friday, February 17, 2012

Nonprofit groups say President Obama's plan to limit tax deductions for charitable contributions could hurt giving to churches and other nonprofits. RNS photo by Sean Locke/iStockPhoto.

WASHINGTON (RNS) For the fourth year in a row, President Obama is proposing lower tax deductions for the wealthy on donations to churches and other nonprofit organizations. And for the fourth year in a row, nonprofit groups say the change would lead to a dramatic drop in charitable giving.

The reduction, included in Obama's 2013 budget proposal, rankled the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.

"We were hoping this would not come up again this year. We asked that they not renew it, but unfortunately the request was not taken," said Nathan Diament, the group's Washington director. "It's a real concern."

Under the Obama proposal, the tax break for charitable donations would fall from 35 percent to 28 percent for the top 2 percent of taxpayers, those earning more than $250,000.

In real terms, that would mean a wealthy taxpayer who donates $10,000 to a charity would be able to only claim a $2,800 deduction on his taxes, rather than the current $3,500.

When it analyzed a similar proposal in Obama's 2012 budget, the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University said it would boost federal revenue by billions of dollars and have a "modest negative effect" on charitable giving.

Obama has argued in the past that it is not fair that the wealthy receive a larger tax break for the same donations to charity when a middle class taxpayer can only claim a deduction of 15 percent. He has also said charities would "do just fine" under the change.

On Thursday (Feb. 16), the White House said the change wouldn't affect the 80 percent of overall contributions that come from individuals and foundations, and is "unlikely to have a substantial impact on donations."

The last time the charitable deduction rules were changed, in 2002-2003 under President George W. Bush, the top rate was lowered from 38.6 percent to 35 percent.

"At that time, the level of individual charitable giving rose, suggesting that other factors are much more important to the process," Jonathan Greenblatt, director of the White House's Office of Social Innovation, wrote on the White House blog.

But charitable groups insist it remains a bad idea.

"At a time when charities are still struggling, this proposal is a bad idea," said Rick Dunham, president and CEO of Texas-based Dunham+Company, an international consulting firm for charitable organizations.

A survey of 1,000 Americans that Dunham's firm commissioned in January found that nearly eight in 10 Americans were against "cutting, capping or limiting the charitable tax deduction ... because charitable tax deductions encourage people to give their money to help others without getting anything tangible in return."

Galen Carey, the Washington director for the National Association of Evangelicals, called the proposal "very counterproductive."

"We fully support the need to reduce the budget deficit," Carey said, "but it doesn't make any sense why this keeps coming up."

Based on 2009 data, 74 percent of Americans' charitable donations went to churches and religious organizations, said Sylvia Ronsvalle, executive vice president of the Illinois-based Empty Tomb research organization, which tracks charitable giving.

(RNS) If you're an atheist who loses a child or loved one, there's no hope of a reunion in the afterlife. The absence of the comfort of religious ritual is one of the hardest adjustments for unbelievers, leading some nonbelievers to craft support groups and resources for grief without God. By Kimberly Winston.More | Comments (0)

SPOKANE, Wash. (RNS) Opponents of same-sex marriage promised a fight at the ballot box after Washington lawmakers took steps to make the state the seventh to legalize gay weddings. By Tracy Simmons.More | Comments (0)

NEWARK, N.J. (RNS) Even as Gov. Chris Christie's threat of a "swift" veto looms, gay rights activists are celebrating after the state Assembly voted on Thursday (Feb. 16) on a bill to legalize same sex marriage in New Jersey. By Maryanne Spoto.More | Comments (0)